Association between Ustekinumab Trough Levels, Serum IL-22, and Oncostatin M Levels and Clinical and Biochemical Outcomes in Patients with Crohn's Disease.

Background: Ustekinumab (UST) has demonstrated effectiveness in treating patients with Crohn's disease. Monitoring treatment response can improve disease management and reduce healthcare costs. We investigated whether UST trough levels (TLs), serum IL22, and Oncostatin M (OSM) levels could be early indicators of non-response by analysing their correlation with clinical and biochemical outcomes in CD. Methods: Patients with CD initiating UST treatment from October 2018 to September 2020 were enrolled at six Italian centres for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Clinical and biochemical data were collected at four time points: baseline, second subcutaneous (SC) dose, fourth SC dose, and 52 weeks. TLs were measured during maintenance, at the second SC dose, and at the fourth SC dose. IL-22 and OSM serum levels were assessed at baseline and the second SC dose. We analysed whether TLs, IL22 levels, and OSM serum levels were associated with clinical response, clinical remission, biochemical remission, and endoscopic remission using the appropriate statistical tests. Results: Out of eighty-four initially enrolled patients, five were lost to follow-up, and eleven discontinued the drug before 52 weeks. At the 52-week time point, 47% achieved biochemical remission based on faecal calprotectin levels, and 61.8% achieved clinical remission. TLs at the second SC dose significantly correlated with biochemical remission at the same time point (p = 0.011). However, TLs did not correlate with clinical remission. Baseline OSM levels did not correlate with biochemical or clinical remission or response. IL22 levels notably decreased during UST therapy (p = 0.000), but its values did not correlate with biochemical or clinical remission. Conclusions: UST is an effective therapy for patients with CD. TLs measured at the second SC dose significantly correlated with biochemical remission, emphasising their potential role in treatment monitoring. Levels of OSM and IL-22, despite a significant decrease in the latter during therapy, did not exhibit correlations with clinical or biochemical outcomes in our study. Further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Ustekinumab safety and effectiveness in patients with ulcerative colitis: results from a large real-life study.

BACKGROUND: Ustekinumab (UST) is an interleukin-12/interleukin-23 receptor antagonist recently approved for treating ulcerative colitis (UC) but with limited real-world data. Therefore, we evaluated the effectiveness and safety of UST in patients with UC in a real-world setting. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study. The primary endpoints were the clinical remission rate (partial Mayo score, PMS, ≤1) and the safety of UST. Other endpoints were corticosteroid-free remission (CSFR) rate, clinical response rate (PMS reduction of at least 2 points), and fecal calprotectin (FC) reduction at week 24. RESULTS: We included 256 consecutive patients with UC (M/F 139/117, median age 52). The clinical remission and clinical response rates at eight weeks were 18.7% (44/235) and 53.2% (125/235), respectively, and 27.6% (42/152) and 61.8% (94/152) at 24 weeks, respectively. At 24 weeks, CSFR was 20.3% (31/152), and FC significantly dropped at week 12 (p = 0.0004) and 24 (p = 0.038). At eight weeks, patients naïve or with one previous biologic treatment showed higher remission (p = 0.002) and clinical >response rates (p = 0.018) than patients previously treated with ≥ 2. Adverse events occurred in six patients (2.3%), whereas four patients (1.6%) underwent colectomy. CONCLUSION: This real-world study shows that UST effectively and safely treats patients with UC.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease: comparison between the first and second pandemic waves.

BACKGROUND: In Italy, the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 infection peaked in April and November 2020, defining two pandemic waves of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study compared the characteristics and outcomes of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) and SARS-CoV-2 infections between pandemic waves. METHODS: Observational longitudinal study of IBD patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Patients with established diagnoses of IBD and of SARS-CoV-2 infection were consecutively enrolled in two periods: (i) first wave, from 1 March 2020 to 31 May 2020; and (ii) second wave, from 15 September to 15 December 2020. RESULTS: We enrolled 937 IBD patients (219 in the first wave, 718 in the second wave). Patients of the first wave were older (mean ± SD: 46.3 ± 16.2 vs. 44.1 ± 15.4 years, p = 0.06), more likely to have ulcerative colitis (58.0% vs. 44.4%, p < 0.001) and comorbidities (48.9% vs. 38.9%; p < 0.01), and more frequently residing in Northern Italy (73.1% vs. 46.0%, p < 0.001) than patients of the second wave. There were no significant differences between pandemic waves in sex (male: 54.3% vs. 53.3%, p = 0.82) or frequency of active IBD (44.3% vs. 39.0%, p = 0.18). The rates of negative outcomes were significantly higher in the first than second wave: pneumonia (27.8% vs. 11.7%, p < 0.001), hospital admission (27.4% vs. 9.7%, p < 0.001), ventilatory support (11.9% vs. 5.4%, p < 0.003) and death (5.5% vs. 1.8%, p < 0.007). CONCLUSION: Between the first and second SARS-CoV-2 pandemic waves, demographic, clinical and geographical features of IBD patients were different as were the symptoms and outcomes of infection. These differences are likely due to the different epidemiological situations and diagnostic possibilities between the two waves.

Use of tofacitinib as first or second-line therapy is associated with better outcomes in patients with ulcerative colitis: data from a real-world study.

BACKGROUND: Data regarding the real-world (RW) use of tofacitinib (TOF) in patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) are limited. We aimed to investigate TOF's RW efficacy and safety in Italian UC patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A retrospective assessment of clinical and endoscopic activity was performed according to the Mayo score. The primary endpoints were to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of TOF. RESULTS: We enrolled 166 patients with a median follow-up of 24 (IQR 8-36) weeks. Clinical remission was achieved in 61/166 (36.7%) and 75/166 (45.2%) patients at 8-week and 24-week follow-ups, respectively. The optimization was requested in 27 (16.3%) patients. Clinical remission was achieved more frequently when TOF was used as a first/second line rather than a third/fourth line treatment (p = 0.007). Mucosal healing was reported in 46% of patients at the median follow-up time. Colectomy occurred in 8 (4.8%) patients. Adverse events occurred in 12 (5.4%) patients and severe in 3 (1.8%). One case of simple Herpes Zoster and one of renal vein thrombosis were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Our RW data confirm that TOF is effective and safe in UC patients. It performs remarkably better when used as the first/second line of treatment.

Real-world efficacy and safety of vedolizumab in managing ulcerative colitis versus Crohn's disease: results from an Italian multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: Vedolizumab (VDZ) can be used to treat refractory ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's disease (CD). We assessed whether there are differences in treating UC vs CD with VDZ. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Mayo score in UC and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index (HBI) in CD scored the clinical activity. Achievement and maintenance of clinical remission during the follow-up, and safety were the primary endpoints. RESULTS: 729 patients (475 with UC and 254 with CD), median follow-up of 18 (IQR 6-36) months, were enrolled. Clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment was achieved in 488 (66.9%) patients (74.4% in CD vs 62.9% in UC, p<0.002) while, during the follow-up, no difference was found (81.5% in the UC group and 81.5% pts in the CD group; p=0.537). The clinical remission at the 6th month of treatment (p=0.001) and being naïve to biologics (p<0.0001) were significantly associated with prolonged clinical remission. The clinical response was significantly higher in UC (90.1%) vs CD (84.3%) (p=0.023), and surgery occurred more frequently in CD (1.9% in UC vs 5.1% in CD, p=0.016). CONCLUSION: We found differences when using VDZ in UC vs CD in real life. These parameters can help the physician predict this drug's longterm efficacy.

Appropriateness of Proton Pump Inhibitor Prescription Evaluated by Using Serological Markers.

Inappropriate prescription of proton pump inhibitors (PPI) has been widely reported, often lacking initial exclusion of Helicobacter pylori (HP) infection and evaluation of gastric functional status. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of gastric functional tests to define the acid output, as well as HP status, in order to better direct PPI therapy prescription. Dyspeptic patients without alarm symptoms from a primary care population were evaluated. For each patient, serum Pepsinogen I (PGI) and II (PGII), gastrin 17 (G17) and anti-HP IgG antibodies (Biohit, Oyj, Finland) were determined. For each subject, data were collected regarding symptoms, past medical history of HP infection, and PPI use. Therapeutic response to PPIs was determined according to PGI and G17 values, where G17 > 7 in the presence of elevated PGI and absence of chronic atrophic gastritis (CAG) was considered an adequate response. Among 2583 dyspeptic patients, 1015/2583 (39.3%) were on PPI therapy for at least 3 months before serum sampling, and were therefore included in the study. Active HP infection and CAG were diagnosed in 206 (20.2%) and 37 (3.6%) patients, respectively. Overall, an adequate therapeutic response to PPIs was observed in 34.9%, reaching 66.7% at the highest dose. However, 41.1% and 20.4% of patients showed low (G17 1-7) or absent (G17 < 1) response to PPI, regardless of the dosage used. According to gastric functional response, most patients currently on PPI maintenance therapy lack a proper indication for continuing this medication, either because acid output is absent (as in CAG) or because gastrin levels fail to rise, indicating absence of gastric acid negative feedback. Lastly, HP eradication is warranted in all patients, and gastric function testing ensures this pathogen is sought for and adequately treated prior to initiating long-term PPI therapy.

Comparison of Performances of Adalimumab Biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have entered the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), allowing for the treatment of a greater number of patients for their reduced cost than the originator. However, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the various ADA biosimilars remains scarce.We compare the efficacy and safety of ADA biosimilars SB5, ABP501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in treating IBD outpatients in a real-life Italian setting. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on consecutive IBD outpatients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was measured using the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the following: (1) induction of remission in patients new to biologics and patients new to ADA but previously exposed to other anti-tumor necrosis factor agents or other biologics; (2) maintenance of remission in patients switched from the ADA originator to an ADA biosimilar; and (3) safety of various biosimilars. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients were enrolled according to the inclusion criteria: 162 patients with UC and 371 patients with CD. Clinical remission was obtained in 79.6% of patients new to biologics and 59.2% of patients new to ADA but not to other biologics; clinical remission was maintained in 81.0% of patients switched from the originator, and adverse events were recorded in 6.7% of patients. There was no significant difference between the 4 ADA biosimilars for each predetermined endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Adalimumab biosimilars are effective and safe in IBD treatment, both in new patients and in patients switched from the ADA originator. No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars.

We treated 533 IBD patients with adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022. No differences between these 4 ADA biosimilars were found for reaching remission in naive patients, maintaining remission for nonmedical switching, clinical response, steroid-free remission, surgery rate, mucosal healing, or safety.

Replacement of Adalimumab Originator to Adalimumab Biosimilar for a Non-Medical Reason in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Real-life Comparison of Adalimumab Biosimilars Currently Available in Italy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars have been included into the therapeutic armamentarium of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD); however, comparative data on the efficacy and safety of the different ADA biosimilars after replacing the ADA originator for a non-medical reason remains scarce. We aimed to compare in a real-life setting the efficacy and safety of four ADA biosimilars SB5, APB501, GP2017, and MSB11022 in IBD patients after replacing the originator for a non-medical reason. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective study was performed on consecutive IBD patients, analyzing clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. The primary endpoints of the study were maintenance of clinical remission and safety of the different biosimilars. RESULTS: 153 patients were enrolled, 26 with UC and 127 with CD. Clinical remission was maintained in 124 out of 153 (81%) patients after a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-24) months, without any significant difference between the four ADA biosimilars. ADA biosimilars dosage was optimized in five patients (3.3%). Loss of remission was significantly higher in UC patients (10/26 patients, 38.5%) than in CD patients (19/127 patients, 14.9%, p<0.025). Adverse events occurred in 12 (7.9%) patients; the large majority were mild. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in efficacy and safety was found between ADA biosimilars when used to replace the ADA originator for a non-medical reason. However, in UC patients the replacement of ADA originator for this reason should be carefully assessed.

A non-invasive combined strategy to improve the appropriateness of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

Background and aim Increasing the appropriateness of upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE) improves the quality of care while containing costs. The aim of this study was to improve the appropriateness of UGIE through a process involving evaluation of prescriptions and the use of a non-invasive alternative. Materials and methods A senior endoscopist evaluated the appropriateness of all outpatient referrals for UGIE and established the proper timing. Referrals were either accepted and programmed, canceled, or substituted by a non-invasive evaluation of gastric function, determining serum levels of gastrin-17 (G17), Pepsinogen I (PGI) and II (PGII), and antibodies against Helicobacter pylori. Results A total of 5102 requests for UGIE examinations were evaluated; 540 (10.4%) were inappropriate and had been prescribed for: gastroesophageal reflux disease (n=307), surveillance with erroneous timing (n=113), dyspepsia (n=66), other indications (n=20), and absence of written indication (n=34). Gastric function was evaluated in 282/540 patients; findings included normal values in 94 patients without proton-pump inhibitor therapy (PPI) and in 48 on PPI, active H pylori infection in 56, previous H pylori infection in 30, GERD in n=50, and atrophic gastritis in n=4. UGIE was performed in the latter 4 cases.  Within 2 years (range 1-22 months) of the initial refusal, 105/504 patients underwent UGIE, with normal endoscopic findings in 71/105 (67.5%), and with no cases of cancer. Conclusions This strategy, based on a strict control of prescriptions, is effective to increase the appropriateness while containing public health costs. The use of gastric function testing improves patient selection for UGIE endoscopy.

Adalimumab Biosimilar GP2017 versus Adalimumab Originator in Treating Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Real-Life, Multicenter, Observational Study.

The approval of adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars for inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) has reduced the cost of treatment. While several ADA biosimilars are currently available, comparative data on the ADA biosimilar GP2017 (HyrimozTM) and its originator (HumiraTM) in IBD are lacking. We compared the efficacy and safety of GP2017 versus originator in IBD outpatients in an Italian real-life setting. This retrospective analysis enrolled consecutive IBD patients with complete clinical, laboratory, and endoscopic data. Clinical activity was assessed with the Mayo score in ulcerative colitis (UC) and the Harvey-Bradshaw Index in Crohn's disease (CD). The primary endpoints were the induction of remission and the safety of GP2017 versus ADA originator. One hundred and thirty-four patients (30.6% with UC and 69.4% with CD, median age 38 years) were enrolled: 62 (46.3%) patients were treated with GP2017, and 72 (53.7%) with ADA originator; 118 (88.1%) patients were naïve to ADA. Clinical remission was obtained in 105 (78.4%) patients, during a median follow-up of 12 months, 82.3% and 75% in the GP2017 and ADA originator groups, respectively (p = 0.311). Treatment was well tolerated in both groups. This analysis of real-world data suggests that GP2017 and its originator are equivalent in terms of efficacy and safety in patients with IBD.

Barrett's esophagus: results from an Italian cohort with tight endoscopic surveillance.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Barrett's Esophagus represents a condition that predisposes to the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma. The aim of the present study was to analyze the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients with BE, to establish the presence of risk factors for this condition, and to determine the frequency of dysplastic lesions as well as the evolution towards adenocarcinoma under tight endoscopic control. METHODS: In this study, we retrospectively collected and analyzed data from a cohort of patients with Barrett's Esophagus identified through endoscopic records of ULSS7 in Northern Italy, who underwent upper esophagogastroduodenoscopy over a 10-year period from July 2008 to December 2020. RESULTS: A total of 264 patients were identified as having BE and included in the study. Mean follow-up was 6.7 years (range: 3 months-13 years). Demographic characteristics of the study population included mean age of 62.7 years (range 33-90 years), with 62.5% of the study population being aged 60 or older, and a male predominance. Females were significantly older than males (65.7 years, range 37-90 vs 61.9 years, range 33-87, p=0.043, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The present study confirms the importance of tight endoscopic control in the management of BE, favoring early detection of BE degeneration towards high-grade dysplasia or adenocarcinoma. In a subset of patients with high-risk factors including male sex, cigarette smoking and heavy alcohol intake, it may be worthwhile to consider endoscopic control over time in order to detect the development of BE.

Comparison of performances of infliximab biosimilars CT-P13 versus SB2 in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases: a real-life multicenter, observational study in Italy.

BACKGROUND: To compare the performances of Infliximab (IFX) biosimilar CT-P13 and SB2 in the treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBD) outpatients in Italy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Three hundred and eighty IBD outpatients were retrospectively evaluated. The primary endpoint was to compare the two IFX biosimilars in terms of reaching and maintenance of remission at any timepoint. RESULTS: 197 patients with Ulcerative Colitis (UC) and 183 patients with Crohn's Disease (CD) treated with CT-P13 or SB2 and having a median (IQR) follow-up of 12 (6-36) months were compared: 230 (60.5%) were naïve to anti-TNFα, 20 (5.26%) were switched from IFX originator or from IFX CT-P13 to IFX SB2. Clinical remission was achieved in 133 (67.5%) UC patients and in 164 (89.6%) CD patients (p < 0.000), with no differences between CT-P13 and SB2 in the rate of remission in UC (p = 0.667) and CD (p = 0.286). Clinical response, steroid-free remission, rate of surgery, mucosal healing (MH) in UC, switching from IFX originator or from other biosimilar, and safety were similar. Higher MH rate was obtained in CD patients treated with CT-P13 (p = 0.004). CONCLUSION: This first comparative study found that both IFX biosimilars CT-P13 and SB2 are effective and safe in managing IBD outpatients.

Long-term, Real-life, Observational Study in Treating Outpatient Ulcerative Colitis with Golimumab.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several studies have found Golimumab (GOL) effective and safe in the short-term treatment of ulcerative colitis (UC), but few long-term data are currently available from real world. Our aim was to assess the long-term real-life efficacy and safety of GOL in managing UC outpatients in Italy. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study assessing consecutive UC outpatients treated with GOL for at least 3-month of follow-up was made. Primary endpoints were the induction and maintenance of remission in UC, defined as Mayo score ≤2. Several secondary endpoints, including clinical response, colectomy rate, steroid free remission and mucosal healing, were also assessed during the follow-up. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy-eight patients were enrolled and followed up for a median (IQR) time of 9 (3-18) months (mean time follow-up: 33.1±13 months). Clinical remission was achieved in 57 (32.1%) patients: these patients continued with GOL, but only 6 patients (3.4%) were still under clinical remission with GOL at the 42nd month of follow-up. Clinical response occurred in 64 (36.4%) patients; colectomy was performed in 8 (7.8%) patients, all of them having primary failure. Steroid-free remission occurred in 23 (12.9%) patients, and mucosal healing was achieved in 29/89 (32.6%) patients. Adverse events occurred in 14 (7.9%) patients. CONCLUSIONS: Golimumab does not seem able to maintain long-term remission in UC in real life. The safety profile was good.

Therapies for inflammatory bowel disease do not pose additional risks for adverse outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infection: an IG-IBD study.

BACKGROUND: Older age and comorbidities are the main risk factors for adverse COVID-19 outcomes in patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). The impact of IBD medications is still under investigation. AIMS: To assess risk factors for adverse outcomes of COVID-19 in IBD patients and use the identified risk factors to build risk indices. METHODS: Observational cohort study. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors associated with pneumonia, hospitalisation, need for ventilatory support, and death. RESULTS: Of the 937 patients (446 with ulcerative colitis [UC]) evaluated, 128 (13.7%) had asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, 664 (70.8%) had a favourable course, and 135 (15.5%) had moderate or severe COVID-19. In UC patients, obesity, active disease and comorbidities were significantly associated with adverse outcomes. In patients with Crohn's disease (CD), age, obesity, comorbidities and an additional immune-mediated inflammatory disease were identified as risk factors. These risk factors were incorporated into two indices to identify patients with UC or CD with a higher risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes. In multivariable analyses, no single IBD medication was associated with poor COVID-19 outcomes, but anti-TNF agents were associated with a lower risk of pneumonia in UC, and lower risks of hospitalisation and severe COVID-19 in CD. CONCLUSION: The course of COVID-19 in patients with IBD is similar to that in the general population. IBD patients with active disease and comorbidities are at greater risk of adverse COVID-19 outcomes. IBD medications do not pose additional risks. The risk indices may help to identify patients who should be prioritised for COVID-19 re-vaccination or for therapies for SARS-CoV-2 infection.

A propensity score-weighted comparison between adalimumab originator and its biosimilars, ABP501 and SB5, in inflammatory bowel disease: a multicenter Italian study.

BACKGROUND: Adalimumab is an effective and safe biological drug for the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Nowadays, several biosimilar agents are available, but data regarding their efficacy and safety in patients with IBD are still lacking. We aimed to compare the effectiveness and tolerability between adalimumab originator, ABP501 and SB5 biosimilars in patients with IBD in the short term (after induction and after 6 months of treatment) through a propensity score-weighted multicenter cohort study. METHODS: We included 156 patients with IBD, 69 patients with ulcerative colitis and 87 patients with Crohn's disease (CD) receiving ABP501 or SB5 biosimilars from January 2019 to April 2020 for moderate-to-severe disease. For comparison, a group of age- and sex-matched patients treated with adalimumab originator was used. We collected clinical and biochemical data after induction and at 6 months of treatment. Endoscopic data were recorded only at baseline. RESULTS: Overall, clinical benefit was achieved by 86.4% and 85.3% after induction and at 6 months, respectively, without a statistically significant difference between the three treatment groups (p = 0.68 and p = 0.46). However, after induction, we found significant differences between the two types of the disease (ulcerative colitis or CD, p = 0.004), with a greater clinical benefit achieved by patients with CD. Also, the therapeutic optimization rate between the three drugs was not statistically significant different (p = 0.30). All treatments showed a good safety profile, with only 10 patients who needed to stop therapy because of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Adalimumab biosimilars seem to be as effective and safe as the originator in patients with IBD. Surely, they represent a great opportunity to reduce the costs of biological therapies, however larger and longer real-life studies are necessary.

Switching from Infliximab Originator to SB2 Biosimilar in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Multicentric Prospective Real-Life Study.

BACKGROUND: Current literature still lacks studies evaluating the effectiveness and safety of switching from Infliximab originator to SB2 biosimilar in Inflammatory Bowel Diseases (IBDs). We aimed to verify the ability of SB2 to maintain the clinical and biochemical response induced by originator after switching. As secondary outcome, we aimed to verify safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of SB2 biosimilar compared with its IFX originator. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled all patients who switched from originator to SB2 at three Italian IBD Units from August 2018 to April 2020. We collected clinical and biochemical data at the time of switch (T0), and at the first (T1) and the second (T2) visits after switching (mean time from switching: 135 and 329 days, respectively). In addition, data regarding therapeutic drug monitoring at T0 and T1 were recorded. RESULTS: Eighty-five IBD patients (28 with Ulcerative Colitis and 57 with Crohn's Disease) were included in the study. At T1, we observed statistically significant modifications in clinical activity of disease (70 patients were in clinical remission at baseline and 60 at T1 p = 0.02), but not at T2 (p = 0.3). Fecal calprotectin values were not different both at T1 and T2 (both p = 0.9) as well as the rate of concomitant treatment with steroids (p = 0.2 and p = 0.1) or immunosuppressants (p = 0.1 and p = 1.0). Moreover, the need for therapeutic optimization from T0 to T1 and from T1 to T2 was found significant (both p = 0.01). No anti-drug antibodies were identified at T1, and no serious adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, our data show that most of the patients switching from Infliximab originator to SB2 maintain the clinical and biochemical remission for at least 1 year. Further data are necessary to understand the clinical implications of these findings in the long term.

Adalimumab biosimilars, ABP501 and SB5, are equally effective and safe as adalimumab originator.

To date, data on effectiveness and safety of Adalimumab (ADA) biosimilars in inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) are lacking. Therefore, we aimed to verify the ability of ABP501 and SB5 to maintain the clinical and biochemical response induced by the ADA originator, after switching to them. We prospectively analyzed data collected from 55 patients with IBD who switched to ABP501, and 25 patients with IBD who switched to SB5, from ADA originator at four IBD Units between 2018 and 2020. In addition, we included an age and sex-matched control group (n = 38) who continued ADA originator for at least two years and who did not switch to a biosimilar drug. Clinical and biochemical data (C-Reactive Protein (CRP), fecal calprotectin (FC)), concomitant steroid and/or immunosuppressant therapy at the time of the switch and after six months were collected. At six months, in the ABP501 group, we did not observe statistically significant modifications in clinical activity of disease (p = 0.09) and FC values (p = 0.90). Some patients (n = 8) needed to add steroids at six months after switching (p = 0.01), however the need for optimization was not significant between the two timepoints (p = 0.70). Finally, 14.5% patients stopped therapy after six months. Similarly, in the SB5 group we observed a stability of clinical activity and FC values (p = 0.90 and p = 0.20), and a concomitant statistically significant decrease in CRP (p = 0.03). There were no differences in steroids/immunosuppressants need or optimizing biological therapy in this group. Finally, drug survival curves of patients who switched from originator to ABP501 and those who continued ADA originator were similar (p = 0.20). Overall, biosimilar drugs seem to be as effective and safe as the originator. Further larger and longer studies are mandatory to understand the clinical implications of these findings.

Long-term real-life efficacy and safety of infliximab and adalimumab in the treatment of inflammatory bowel diseases outpatients.

BACKGROUND: Infliximab and adalimumab are widely used for the treatment of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. AIM: To compare the long-term efficacy and safety of infliximab and adalimumab in a large cohort of Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis patients reflecting real-life clinical practice. METHODS: Seven hundred twelve patients were retrospectively reviewed, 410 with Crohn's disease (268 treated with adalimumab and 142 with infliximab; median follow-up 60 months, range, 36-72) and 302 with ulcerative colitis (118 treated with adalimumab and 184 with infliximab; median follow-up 48 months, range, 36-84). RESULTS: In Crohn's disease, clinical remission was maintained in 75.0% of adalimumab vs. in 72.5% of infliximab patients (P = 0.699); mucosal healing and steroid-free remission were maintained in 49.5% of adalimumab vs. 63.9% of infliximab patients (P = 0.077) and in 77.7% of adalimumab vs. 77.3% in infliximab group (P = 0.957), respectively. In ulcerative colitis, clinical remission was maintained in 50.0% of adalimumab vs. 65.8% of infliximab patients (P < 0.000); mucosal healing and steroid-free remission were maintained in 80.6% of adalimumab vs. 77.0% of infliximab patients (P = 0.494) and in 90.2% of adalimumab vs. 87.5% of infliximab patients (P = 0.662), respectively. At the multivariate analysis, ileocolonic location and simple endoscopic score for Crohn's disease >10 were predictors of failure in Crohn's disease; treatment with adalimumab, BMI ≥30 and Mayo score >10 were predictors of failure in ulcerative colitis. infliximab was more likely to cause adverse events than adalimumab (16.6 vs. 6.2%, P < 0.000). CONCLUSION: Both adalimumab and infliximab are effective in long-term outpatients management of inflammatory bowel diseases. Adalimumab had a lower rate of adverse events.

Low Levels of Gastrin 17 are Related with Endoscopic Findings of Esophagitis and Typical Symptoms of GERD.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In clinical practice, most patients with symptoms suggestive of gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) undergo esophago-gastro-duodenoscopy (EGD), despite its low sensitivity in detecting reflux stigmata. Gastrin 17 (G-17) has been proposed to be related with GERD, due to the negative feedback between acid secretion and this hormone. We assessed the clinical usefulness of fasting G-17 serum determination for a non-invasive diagnosis of GERD in patients with typical symptoms. METHODS: We consecutively enrolled patients complaining of typical GERD symptoms in two different settings: a single referral center and a primary care setting. Control groups consisted of dyspeptic patients. All subjects underwent assessment of serum levels of G-17 and EGD. RESULTS: At the academic hospital, 100 GERD patients (n=89 with erosive esophagitis and 11 with Barrett's esophagus) had statistically significant low levels of G-17 as compared with 184 dyspeptic patients (1.7±1.2 pg/L vs 8.9±5.7 pg/L p<0.0001). Similarly, in the primary care setting, 163 GERD patients had statistically significant low levels of G-17 as compared with 132 dyspeptic patients (0.5±0.2 pg/L vs. 4.0±2.6 pg/L, p<0.0001). Moreover, in the primary care setting, no statistically significant differences were found for G-17 levels between patients with erosive and non-erosive reflux pattern (0.4±0.2 vs 0.7±0.3; p=0.08). In primary care, the accuracy of G-17 less than 1 pg/L to diagnose non-invasively GERD was 94.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Low levels of G-17 were detected in patients with erosive esophagitis and Barrett's esophagus in a referral center and in patients with typical GERD symptoms in a sample of patients from a primary care setting.

Two-year effectiveness and safety of golimumab in ulcerative colitis: An IG-IBD study.

BACKGROUND: Few data exist regarding the long-term effectiveness of golimumab in ulcerative colitis. No data have been reported on real-world continuous clinical response. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to describe the long-term outcomes in a large cohort of patients on golimumab who had ulcerative colitis. METHODS: Consecutive patients with active ulcerative colitis, started on golimumab, were enrolled and prospectively followed up. The primary end point was to evaluate the long-term persistence on golimumab therapy. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients with ulcerative colitis were studied. Of these, 79.2% were steroid dependent, and 46.3% were naïve to anti-tumour necrosis factor alpha agents. The median duration of golimumab therapy was 52 weeks (range: 4-142 weeks). The cumulative probability of maintaining golimumab treatment was 47.3% and 22.5% at 54 and 108 weeks, respectively. Biological-naïve status (odds ratio [OR] = 3.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.44-6.29; p = 0.003) and being able to discontinue steroids at Week 8 (OR = 3.32, 95% CI: 1.34-8.30; p = 0.010) and Week 14 (OR = 2.94, 95% CI: 1.08-8.02; p = 0.036) were associated with longer persistence on therapy. At Week 54, 65/124 (52.4%) postinduction responders were in continuous clinical response. A continuous clinical response was associated with a lower likelihood of golimumab discontinuation throughout the subsequent year of therapy (p < 0.01). Overall, 40 (23.1%) patients were in clinical remission at the last follow-up visit. Twenty-six adverse events were recorded, leading to golimumab withdrawal in 9.2% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Biological-naïve status and not requiring steroids at Weeks 8 and 14 seem to be associated with a longer persistence on golimumab therapy in ulcerative colitis.